click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
check. do people agree with the obama administration, this threat of going off the cliff if rates aren't reached. here's what nancy pelosi had to say about geithner's remarks. let me play it. >> if there is no agreement, then the fiscal cliff has to be dealt with. i didn't see it if they decent this, we do that. i saw it as a statement of fact. it's not a threat. it's a prediction. if there's no agreement, we go over the cliff. let's hope we can have an agreement. >> what do you make of the way she put it? it's not a threat. she said, listen, these are the facts. >> nice little economy you have there. nice little economy you have there. it would be a shame it if anything happened to it. that's not a threat. look, we have to start looking at what happens if we do, in fact, go over the so-called cliff, and what happens is, you know, one thing is we take a huge bite out of the deficit. we do it in a crude may, and there would be immediate attempts to fix it and fine-tune it and take some back. some would probably get through. if you actually want to look at it from a policy standpoint, it
. there's no prospect to an agreement that doesn't involve those rates going up on the top 2% of the wealthiest. >> so is it a bluff when the obama administration says they're willing to go off the cliff if a deal is not reached on rates? >> i don't think it's a bluff. if you look at the reality of what happens, all the leverage which i -- right now clearly the white house has. they get more leverage if we go over their cliff. you can argue that would not send a good message to the country, to the world. it would prove that we are dysfunctional and cannot govern, et cetera, et cetera. in terms of dealing with the policy problem, which is you have this massive and growing debt, you have to bring in more revenues. there's multiple ways to do it, but critical ways to raise rates on the top end. it was what the election was about. republicans want to play the game where they think they get something. at the end of the day they lose worse if we go over the cliff. >> that's an interesting insight because you have alan simpson on the "today" show asked dp one side is a winner or los
impact. >> getner says the obama administration is only too willing to go over the qulif. cliff. do they mean marginal rates, or just rates. >> that's what's going to be worked out, the last minute deal that's where you find wiggle room. >> i guarantee you there's guys in boehner's camp that are ready to go over, too. >> but he's been moving to marginalize those peel. this is his way of taking control of the party. >> the question is why do they care where the money comes from. if you have a revenue target, then fine. but we need $800 million in revenue. john wehner figured it out. and boehner can turn around and say i need $6 trillion in titlement cuts. and they can each take each other's playbook and try and figure out what they would like best to -- figure out the number and figure out how to get there. >> i don't know. both sides seem to be only too willing to do it. they're in the booking rove on fox because of that fiasco. which made good tv, but apparent apparently, i don't know, but he says republicans will get the blame for going off the cliff, but the president will be wea
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3